Guns, Violence, Race and the Beauty of Biological Differences
An Enhanced Commentary on that of Nick Fuentes
This is currently a very charged and emotional topic in America, and elsewhere. Let’s treat it with rationality and mature calmness—-stripped of neo-pragmatic modes of Rortarian untruth telling.
Nick Fuentes || Senate Candidate Blake Masters Points Out the Demographics of Crime | Three Spoons (gab.com) [Please see clickable link.]
America is finding its ability to speak truth again, including uncomfortable truths. Nick Fuentes is excellent at pushing the Overton Window in the right direction.
I have a bit more positive take than Nick, and a potentially more optimistic thing to say, while still being forcefully honest and Red Pilled about race. (Please do look up the term "Red Pilled" if you do not know what that specific term means---it is a very important concept for current discussions, and no, it does not mean wearing a red, "MAGA" hat nor voting Republican---as many uninformed Liberals think.) I stress that culture, that is, different racial and even ethnic cultures, emerge from differences in the biologies of different peoples---including very prominently their neurobiology. Elsewhere I have called this by the term, ‘neuroculture’.
The real kicker is how I discuss the FACT of there being biological differences between people from different parts of the world. First, I recognize that people are matched to the biogeographic areas and the conditions where they--or their ancestors--originated. Second, I assert that these realities of race and adaptation to biogeography are good. This is how God works. It is how evolutionary adaptation works.
Thus, human beings have profound, defining differences between them as well as sharing profound similarities that enable them to be fit into the genus and species: Homo sapiens. The similarities enable us to speak of the natural, or cardinal, as well as the theological virtues being expected and aspirational for all human beings. How different races and ethnic cultures achieve this, or how they grow towards this, is the aspect of legitimate differences among them.
Schmitt's Dictum on National Borders: "Borders--properly and ever-vigorously maintained--are active, vital, essential structures that make possible the existence and protection of international as well as personal conversation, equitable trade, just laws and mutual advancement. Borders are channels for peaceful communication that foster shared as well as unique pathways toward continued development. Borders permit vibrant, temporary travel for business, education, scientific research and pleasure-—as well as for sane, limited immigration. Mass migration, on the contrary, is a tool of those who are hostile to human beings from almost all global regions and races.
National borders, because they involve biogeographic realities in complicated ways, share thematic similarities with other biological realities such as cell membranes and epithelial linings surrounding the exposed surfaces of organisms and interfacing tissue layers with hollow, noncellular media and matrices in hollow organs and structures. These interfaces, or borders, are not some symbol of an odious reality. Biological systems absolutely require—and thrive—when there are differences and gradients separated by some semipermeable barrier. Semipermeability refers to the fact that we are not talking about Saran wrap coatings. These borders are active and exquisitely regulated by conditions on either side of the membranes—-as should be the national borders between countries. These are, therefore, vital realities. Put more forcefully, life could not exist otherwise. All differences are not to be dissolved as if the mere word, ‘difference’ denoted an unspeakable evil. Even the “woke” Left places itself in self-contradictory tangles attempting to pursue such philosophically naive and sophomoric ideas.
Yes, people are tribal, but I would adjust Mr. Fuentes' comments a bit. It is when borders are no longer the channel for communication, that the oxymoronic policy of a fraudulent and manipulative multiculturalism against genuine, bordered multiculturalism supplants good and just order and leads inevitably to a massively increased likelihood of violence.
I would insert that people will always have the potential for violence---as do all animals, and even many plants, as in self-defense and in the acquisition of food. Frankly, this is all good. Multiculturalist fantasies that involve borderless worlds are a major contributory cause of wars and massive hot pockets of killing and mayhem around the globe. We can, in opposition to this, create national structures and restore institutions for radically reducing violence, crime and war for the good of all races. In order to do so, we need to know the true nature of the problems. (It seems ridiculous to have to make that statement, but in America and Europe, in particular, and the Commonwealth nations in general, people have let themselves become confused about that simple truth.)
It must be acknowledged that some races are more prone to violence to a degree that is not necessarily a good thing, or definitively not a good thing. It is their duty to themselves and to other peoples to deal with this aspect of their bio-cultural development within their own bordered nation and not to export such violence elsewhere.
Every race, ethnicity and culture has aspects of their character that can be improved. Cultural evolutionary change can, and does, occur and it occurs most rapidly and productively within the laboratory of one's own, bordered nation.
I believe Mr. Fuentes would agree with what I just stated, in large part, if he could redo and adjust his presentation. It was a matter of emphasis more than ideology.
Mr. Fuentes merits my "Courageous Adult Award."